The expansion of the Dopamine complaint crosses borders and focuses on possible espionage.
The Argentine government has filed an expanded criminal complaint against the Uruguayan streaming channel Dopamina for the dissemination of audio recordings that, according to the Ministry of Security, were obtained clandestinely and disseminated for strategic purposes. The complaint was filed with the federal court by attorney Fernando Soto on behalf of the Ministry of Security, headed by Patricia Bullrich.
The audio recordings, attributed to the Secretary General of the Presidency, Karina Milei, began circulating in various media outlets and platforms and prompted precautionary measures in Argentina to suspend their reproduction in the country. The government maintains that the dissemination from platforms outside the country attempts to circumvent these restrictions and that there is a pattern of publication by "episodes."
In its presentation, the Executive Branch describes the alleged illicit acquisition of the recordings and argues that they were preserved and gradually released at politically sensitive times, which the complaint describes as evidence of illegal espionage. The case aims to obtain forensic expert reports and requests for international cooperation to identify the source and those responsible.
🔴 They're playing Karina's audio that was going to be published before the censorship. In it, Karina says, "You have to stay below Martín." – "I respect Martín as a leader." pic.twitter.com/66XuqwRkA6
— Dopamine® (@estoesdopamine) September 2, 2025
Dopamine rejected the accusation and argued that the precautionary measure issued in Argentina was insufficient because it operated from Uruguay. The outlet also stated that it merely disseminated material and denied having participated in obtaining the recordings, claiming that the order amounts to a form of prior censorship. The channel requested that any formal notification be made through judicial channels.
The case also falls under previous leaks that reached Argentine officials, including recordings linked to the former director of the National Disability Agency, which triggered raids and investigations into alleged irregularities in state procurement. This information heightened public and judicial sensitivity to new revelations.
Legal experts and press organizations warn of the tension between the protection of public officials' privacy and the right to information; they are also debating the applicability of national precautionary measures against platforms based abroad. In the next steps, the courts must decide on evidentiary measures, possible cooperation requests, and whether to request diplomatic assistance.
